Movie mode

The 1080p/60p video spec adopted by the D5300 trickles down to the D3300. Maximum clip record time is 20 minutes, and H.264/MPEG-4 compression is used.

Filetype

1920 x 1080 (60/50p): 37 Mbps

1920 x 1080 (30p): 24 Mbps

1920 x 1080 (25/24p): 23 Mbps

1280 x 720 (60/50p): 22 Mbps bitrate

640 x 424 (30/25p): 7 Mbps bitrate

Audio

Linear PCM (Mono with internal mic, stereo via 3.5mm input)

Features

The most obvious thing missing here for video shooters is an articulated LCD, a feature reserved for the step-up model above this one. For those who want them, the camera offers access to exposure controls for video, but getting there is a little tricky. By enabling 'Manual Movie Mode' and entering full manual mode in live view, you'll gain access to some exposure controls. Without this mode enabled, all exposure modes in live view are essentially auto modes once you start recording video.

Full-time servo AF is available while recording video, as are face detection and subject tracking. The D3300 provides an input for external microphone by way of a 3.5mm stereo jack. There's a built-in monaural microphone with 20 levels of manually adjustable sensitivity settings.

Handling

Recording video on the D3300 first requires you to engage live view via the 'Lv' button on the rear panel. You can then initiate a recording by pressing the red movie record button sitting just behind the shutter release. To prevent accidental operation, the record button is disabled when live view is turned off.

Like other Nikon APS-C cameras, aperture can't be adjusted in live view shooting. You can change the aperture value displayed on the screen, but the aperture itself won't move until you've fired the shutter. This gets confusing when you start recording video in manual mode, since although you can change the aperture value that appears on the screen, you'll really be using whatever aperture was set when you entered live view.

For this, Nikon engineers present 'Manual Movie Mode' as a workaround. Picking this option from the shooting menu imposes a minimum shutter speed of 1/60sec in full Manual live view mode, and prevents the displayed aperture value from changing - thus, the aperture it says you're using in live view is the one you're actually using when you hit 'record.' It's possible to change the aperture in a roundabout way - switching to aperture priority mode or and taking a still, or leaving live view and adjusting the aperture. 'Manual Movie Mode' also enables live exposure preview in live view manual shooting.

Video Quality

At its highest resolution and 60p framerate, the D3300 produces very good, detailed video. At this framerate action is quite smooth, so it might be ideal for things like casual video of kids' sporting events. As in still shooting, as light levels drop fine detail tends to become smudged, and grain in shadow areas is kept under control. There's a fair amount of moiré where you'd expect to see it pop up, but it's not enough to worry about for casual shooting.

Auto focus modes available in live view (and consequently video mode) include AF-S single-servo and full-time 'AF-F.' Tracking, face detect, normal and wide AF area modes are available. Provided your subject has a high contrast edge and doesn't move too erratically, subject tracking with full-time AF works well enough. There's the risk though that the focus will jump off into the distance and ruin your footage, so it's not your best bet for critical video recording, though. The camera's microphone picks up the sound of the AF system at work, at least with the 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 VR II kit lens, producing footage with bursts of slightly annoying electronic sounds sprinkled throughout. This sound isn't limited to continuous focus; it will be present anytime the AF system acquires focus while recording video.

We did see some rolling shutter, but only with very quick subjects or rapid panning from side to side. In most use cases, the camera's readout is fast enough to mitigate the effect.

Sample 1

The sample below was recorded with sunset well underway, so light level is less than ideal. The overall scene is slightly soft, but considering the dim conditions the results are more than acceptable.

Sample 3

Studio

Turning the D3300's video capabilities on our studio test scene revealed a good deal of moiré in the tightly patterned areas. This kind of harsh red distortion didn't crop up in real-world shooting, likely due to the inherent softness of the kit zoom as compared to the 50mm lens used for studio testing.

Comments

Hi am Daniel, Got ma Nikon D3300 few weeks ago and i was doing some test shoots and everything was fine till i decided to do some test shoots in de dark because our electricity lines were off, i put my phones torchlight on and placed it on a table at the background and started panning my camera from left to right as usual and i had some nice flares tho. Few hours later i saw something I don’t even know how to call it on the LCD Monitor (part of it), looks like Fog or Vapour to me so I decided to disconnect my DX NIKKOR 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR II Lens. I waited for 30 minutes and to my surprise it disappeared and I was Happy. But since that incidence, any time I put on my camera and use it for time I see de Fog or Vapour on it and when I put it off it disappears within the next 30minutes. Please I need your help to resolve this because am currently angry with my D3300. Thanks

Can I use a zoom lens (AF 18-135 3.5 5.6) from my D40X on my D3300 camera and the 18-55mm lens from my d3300 on my D40x without damaging either? The zoom lens has a nicer picture than the 18-55. Maybe my imagination.

I 'm new to the world of photography and I want to buy a new camera. I am deciding between two cameras for beginners the nikon D3200 or D3300, they both are at the same price, the difference is that the D3200 comes with two lenses (a 55-200 mm) and the nikon D3300 only with 18-55 mm, which one should I buy? I need some help to decide..

Just ordered my D3300 with 35mm f/1.8 DX as everyday travel camera. Had the D3100 before: while my D800 and D600 are the perfect tools for specific projects and events, the D3xxx is the one I just throw into my office rucksack every day, sometimes just by itself, sometimes in combination with the little BeeFree-tripod and pano-head. The D3xxx never let me down: with its light weight and robust construction it takes more abuse than most so called semipro bodies. Best value for money you can buy!

I agree! The D3XXX line are excellent snapshot and travel cameras. They take superb photos and you're not out a lot of money if something happens to it. And feature-wise they're a much better value than mid-range compacts. It's annoying that reviewers insist on assigning users to a camera. The D3300 is much more than just a beginner's camera.

I 'm new to the world of photography and I want to buy a new camera. I am deciding between two cameras for beginners the nikon D3200 or D3300, they both are at the same price, the difference is that the D3200 comes with two lenses (a 55-200 mm) and the nikon D3300 only with 18-55 mm, which one should I buy? I need some help to decide..

The only thing I am not being able to learn is how to use the zoom to get far away shots of my birds like the old cannon I am used to with the pull lever.. any ideas on this one appreciated. ( I mean get far away things up close and personal) Am I needing a special lens for this one?

I don't know if I got a faulty kit lens (55-200mm) but I have the same problem. I have been unable to obtain focused zoom images of birds with this camera, no mater the AF mode. Center weight is best but I should be able to track a MOVING bird. At distance with too many competing AF targets (branches/leaves) — even with excellent light — images lack focus or appear to have shallow depth of field.

My research reveals one possible culprit. The D3300 has only one cross-linked AF point, whereas the F3.5 maximum kit lens aperture doesn't allow that cross-lined AF point to operate (requires a brighter/faster lens apparently).

The review for this camera briefly mentions that this isn't the best DSLR for sports enthusiasts. Well, that also applies to birders too.

See "Pratical Consequences":

http://www.digitalbirdphotography.com/2.6.html

Without a tripod and a fixed-in-place taxidermy bird this camera (or kit zoom lens) is not up to the task. A faster shutter only goes so far.

I’m most interested in the video capabilities of this camera. This site provided the first downloadable raw sample i have seen so far.I see no bad focus on the video, at 100% zoom (cars passing in london, passing under a bridge).The quality of the video is also fine, given it’s 50p.I would rather see a 24fps sample, since it would have much less compression, and that’s what 90% of the people use 90% of the time. 50p is just a low quality feature in case slow-motion is needed.

I realize that this came about 7 months ago. I was once a full blown Nikon supporter use Nikon.As it was stated earlier the Nikon quality has gone down to pot. I bought the all mighty d7100 after a year....one year there are now oil spots on the sensor. Spots that I can not afford to pay to remove .It will cost me up to 400.00 to fix the problem because no longer under warranty. I will no longer recommend a Nikon to anyone!! Better going with the Canon. There are two cameras as soon as I can afford one of the 2 . One Fuji x10-1 And the a6000. The nay Sayers will get on their soap boxes. But ask why are most of the pros going to these cameras? not the ones that hold workshops to make money but the real pros out making taking real photos. Not the armchair expert wanabes. Enough Never ever buy a Nikon! I cant even trade for a different ca,mera!

Yet another person with one comment making up a problem with a camera he claims to own. I don't believe he even has a D7100, let alone been quoted 400 (anythings?) to clean the sensor. My guess would be Rupees.Scattered through every thread on this site are these names which just appear for one or two posts, make up some story about how they bought a Nikon/Canon/Pentax something and it killed their dog and burnt the house down.Most sensible realise the true value of these posts is precisely nothing.

For the price I would argue that this is the best budget DSLR camera on the market. Excellent photo quality, and the high mega pixel means that you can crop out any unwanted crap without a huge loss in photo quality

Another class of photographer for whom this camera might be a very good value, is the older person looking for an easy carry, and minimalist quality imaging. I've yet to take an image that can't give everything I want through a few steps in raw processing. And I'm using the scene and Auto modes almost exclusively for family and travel. The older generation digital cameras I sold off to pay for the D3300 kit and second lens, were much more fiddly.

Nice review, i realy love Nikon D3300, D3XXX is a very successful series from Nikon, easy to use while provide great image quality.i even write an article where i compare Nikon D3200 to all other cameras under 700$, you can learn much information about it:http://nikond3200news.blogspot.com/2014/06/nikon-d3200-is-it-best-dslr-camera-for-beginner.html

If you can buy a $600 camera that delivers images only a pro can tell the difference from a $3,000 camera why not Then in two years when the next Nikon problem surfaces instead of being out thousands of dollars you throw away the $600 one We paid $1350 for a D70 Three years later card reader error rendering camera useless. Years later find out this was common to every D7O and Nikon would not stand behind. D600 people pay thousands for and find oil spots on lens causing picture anomalies. Buy a D800e might as well place 3k on the back porch and burn it, get it over with instead of waiting for the camera to fail just when you need it most and Nikon do nothing. So the idea of a low priced Camera delivering Nikon quality shots at a price you can just throw them in the garbage every couple years aligns better with Nikon's inability to deliver reliable performance and stand behind their known issues. Nikon should sell just the body and maybe even in a three pack in a dixie cup dispenser?

You talk about Fuji X-A1...but tell me! How much cost the (excellent) Fuji lenses??? If you are reviewing Interchangeable lenses cameras you must take into account the price of the lenses. Fuji lenses are all +400€ lenses. So much for the cheap body...

My comments apply to both the D3300 and D3200. Nikon USA is, I think, underrating these cameras by marketing them as "entry level" only and refusing to sell them without kit lenses. I started in serious photography in 1955 and have been satisfied with the feature set of the D3100, but wanted the higher resolution and ISO levels now available. I shoot RAW with a specified ISO and don't care about jpeg in camera processing. I have 2 "CPU" lenses which replace the kit lens, as well as 4 excellent older prime lenses which can take advantage of a higher resolution sensor. Why on earth would I want to pay for another lens I don't use.

Nikon sells these cameras abroad with a body only option. Why not here?

I just bought a refurbished D3200 body to bypass this problem. Had a new D3300 body with a USA warranty been available I might have gone for it.

Check RAWs ISO100 to ISO400 in comparison to ISO800. They are not focused right, cause ISO800 appears sharper than the lower ISO settings. This little camera has an excellent potential to produce a class leading output paired with something really sharp like Nikkor 40mm f/2.8 micro or some other good prime. And why did it miss-focuss at those settings, well AF matrix also matters...

As a recent D3300 owner, this camera would appear to have a mind of its own.

1) Under full sun it will "decide" to use flash whereas I shot an entire event in deep mid afternoon shadow and found it frustrating that the flash would not activate in many auto/scene modes. (Also, am I correct in that there is no manual override — that is, "force on" — for fill flash use? Or am I missing something?)

2) In my own tests, ISO 400 images will instead be shot at 3200 and so on --- even when the camera is NOT in a default auto ISO setting. Consequently, I have begun to question if my D3300 is defective?

3) The sample images in this review contain very little in the way of architecture. My fist trip out with this camera did, and the "modest" distortion at wide angle using the kit lens seemed rather severe to me, in spite of distortion control enabled. Toggling the Distortion Control on vs. off is of no apparent benefit.

4) My D3300 seems to struggle in conditions where my P&S Nikon L610 doesn't. In low indoor light colors that should be teal green are royal blue. Outdoors, reds/yellows are exaggerated. Attempts to set a manual white balance indoors produced severe magenta or blue casts whereas I had no issues setting manual white balance with my old DSLR.

5) Default JPEG color is too punchy/contrasty, requiring Gamma Correction in Photoshop. Subjects shot outdoors under shadow have a bluish or magenta cast, while under bright sun there is a pronounced orange/yellow cast, which dulls the blue of the sky, makes foliage look brown and fair skin-tones look Sunkist Orange.

6) When I run auto levels and auto color under Photoshop, PS wants to shift JPEG images captured under direct sun to a drastic Cyan or Yellow.

I'd like the option to go from "Standard" to "Neutral" color capture but those choices are locked out of most of the scene/auto modes, available only in the PSAM settings.

Looking for input… From the sound of things, do I just need to spend more time learning the ins-and-outs of the D3300 or does it appear to have "issues" above and beyond the fact that it is new to me? My previous DSLR was an Olympus E-300; it's been awhile since I've ventured into the DSLR market. Hence, I'm wondering how much of this is an acclimation issue vs. camera malfunction?

For the ISO changing even when you set the ISO this is probably due to "Auto ISO" in the menu being on. It drove me up the wall on my D40 shooting in full manual mode and the camera was still overriding what I set by changing the iso. Setting this to off in the menu fixed it.

I guess it would be best to learn to shoot in a PASM mode so that you can set the picture control. You should be able to adjust things like contrast, saturation etc... to your liking. White balance is harder if you shoot jpegs. I shoot raw so I always readjust white balance later if I need to. You should be able to choose white balance presets and see how that works out

I was considering buying a Nikon D3300. My background is very much an enthusiast photographer, coming from the film days.

Nikon D3300: looks good, the 24mp is of course attractive, but the menu driven system mostly is a put-off for me (I would have liked some more physical controls). The 95% viewfinder coverage is also not good and the so many auto settings not good for me either. You need to question whether you really need the 24mp (I personally do not print large photos and do not either crop a lot).

I went the extra mile of adding £200 to my budget and ordered the Nikon D7000 with 18-105 lens. With 16mp (enough for my needs), 100% viewfinder coverage, good AF, LCD screen on the top, tilting 3in screen, weather-proof body, and good build quality (still quite far of my Nikon FM3a though) I am happy.

Kostis, The D33/53 series bodies are marketed at those who don't use/need the settings you want to access easily. You made a wise choice with the D7000, and would have been fine with the D7100 as well.

Does it really cost hundred$ of dollar$ to add a tilting screen and to unblock bracketing in it's internal software? Meet the D5300. This is why I no longer buy Nikon. You KNOW the D5300 could sell for the price of a D3300, because they have identical production costs, but you can't have it for that price. Pay a couple hundred extra if you want the $1 in extra hardware and the unlocking of the software.

Buy a Leica T and get your moneys worth. Seriously, why complain about some of the best perfomance/money compromise you could buy? I am thinking of getting a D3300 or an even cheaper D3200, as a complement to my serious DSLR, and pair it with some of my better lenses, like 70-200 VR which will produce some serious IQ that will rival anything on the market short of FF.

Value for money? When I saw the prices for Leica T with its Japanese lenses I thought it was a rip-off. A used Leica M9 makes much more sense. Not that I have handled the T. The price of M240s seem to be falling. Now there's a camera.............Philip

MY POINT WAS... usually (even with the others) you get more resolution, or a better or bigger sensor, faster engine (processing), better stuff like that... not just an extra HINGE and not having some lines of code left out! that is just an insult!

@Kryz... ok, d5200 vs d3200 then. I don't care for wifi or gps anyways. I have wifi in my nx20 and never use it. and I'm seeing news reports that people are getting tracked online via their photos now, because of that gps feature. I can do without the gimmicks and invasion of privacy thank you.

The D3300 is a solid camera. As the review states, though, times they are a-changin'. Is it better than, or does it even have a reason to exist next to, mirrorless cameras carrying a similar price and feature set? That is the question...

With each generation, the entry level dSLR becomes harder and harder to recommend to people just looking for a casual camera with good image quality.

Once it was a no-brainer: "Yeah, get a D40. Sure, the D60. The D3000, definitely." Today... no. I wouldn't. I can't even in all honesty imagine what kind of person I would recommend the D3300, or even its discounted predecessor, the D3200, to.

Like I said in another post. And what's the price of lenses of mirrorless cameras? Not to mention you get less quality of lenses for a higher price. You re saying that people will buy only one body one lens? But that's not what you're supposed to do with an interchangeable lens camera. Show me a quality 50mm for 150/200€ and I'll buy a mirrorless...

If you can buy a $600 camera that delivers images only a pro can tell the difference from a $3,000 camera why not Then in two years when the next Nikon problem surfaces instead of being out thousands of dollars you throw away the $600 one We paid $1350 for a D70 Three years later card reader error rendering camera useless. Years later find out this was common to every D7O and Nikon would not stand behind. D600 people pay thousands for and find oil spots on lens causing picture anomalies. Buy a D800e might as well place 3k on the back porch and burn it, get it over with instead of waiting for the camera to fail just when you need it most and Nikon do nothing. So the idea of a low priced Camera delivering Nikon quality shots at a price you can just throw them in the garbage every couple years aligns better with Nikon's inability to deliver reliable performance and stand behind their known issues. Nikon should sell just the body and maybe even in a three pack in a dixie cup dispenser?

Haha when you work at a Camera Store and you leave your DPreview logged in on your day off. Your coworkers WILL mess with your account and make comments on articles. I'm keeping the dog with the mustache display photo though. I think it's fantastic.

A lot of talks from people reading a review. I have the D3300, and with 2900 shots with three different lenses, I KNOW what the camera is like: Shooting only RAW, I get the pictures I want, and even underexosure of 2 EV I can get almost fully recovered pictures(!). Easy handling, fast operations, amazing battery life, all the buttons I want/need, lightweight, no wi-fi/gps (thanks! I hate it, drains battery & adds weight). I am actually stunned by the quality of the images. At ISO 6400, using a 50mm 1.8 in very low light, the output is fantastic. Compared to 5D Mark II, the IQ up to ISO 800 is on pair. And don't argue, if You don't have the experience with theese cameras - I do. 'Nuf said!

You get better battery life without the GPS. To me, the GPS and the WiFi aren't critical, maybe even detrimental.

I recently purchased the D3300 and it focuses fast and takes great photos. You don't have to keep Live View on (saves battery to use the view finder). I obtained ~650 photos on the first charge.

I wasn't planning on buying this model until I saw it side-by-side with the competition in a display. The D3300 is a standout in terms of form factor/handling — not just the body but with respect to lenses, too. The D3300 is among the lightest and most compact DSLR out there. The D3300, compared to Canon's compact DSLR, has an improved lens design that makes the overall size smaller (with newly designed kit lens, that is). While the size/weight of this camera may be of little consequence to some, that was a deciding factor for me because I have issues with pinched nerves in the spine and don't need any unnecessary bulk/weight in a camera.

I like the comment..."Though a little long in the tooth, the Panasonic Lumix GF6"This camera only came out last year ( about September? ) and its already being classed as long in the tooth.You can see why manufacturers keep updating their line ups for no apparent reason when you get reviews like this.The " I must have the latest gear" brigade must be throwing out their G6s in droves because its a bit long in the tooth after reading this.Dear life....whats the world coming to??

What is wrong with the lighting in the test scene?It is uneven with edge of scene reflections in the flash lit set and the left lamp/s seems to be off in the tungsten lit set!This is hopeless for any decent evaluations!

These cameras don't need to be exciting, they just sell anyway. Entry- and mid-level DSLRs from Canon and Nikon are by far the bestsellers in the system camera market, but they rarely stir up any excitement in internet forums. The target users for these cameras generally don't care about the same things as enthusiasts and gearheads do.

Excellent review, Allison. Undoubtedly a fine camera. But where Nikon loses me is in the way products are crippled. As you pay more, sure, better viewfinder coverage, brighter viewfinder, faster AF, more AF points, better weathersealing, etc. but there is no reason this model shouldn't have the full Adaptive Lighting implementation. Back to Pentax for me should I buy a new DSLR.

Nikon removes some features for reasons of cost, obviously, and others for reasons of simplification.

There was a setting on my old D200 for changing the diameter of the CW metering circle. I mean - do you really think that feature belongs on an entry level dSLR, even it was a simple firmware edit to enable it?

Nikon fine tunes the settings to match the level of what it thinks the user needs. (not what will most excite dpreview readers) So Adaptive Lighting in JPEG mode is off/auto. Most people who buy the camera will be happy with that - the review suggests it works well - and the full setting are available under ViewNX2 if you need to adjust them later anyway.

Traduction: If you want to waste 600usd, don´t know what you want as a camera except that is something to hang on you neck to convince yourself and other fools you know photography, run to this cr6p. If you it´s not your case, runaway from this cr6p.

These entry level DSLR's from Nikon are cracking good value and great cameras. As an experienced photographer I actually prefer the entry level set up with less buttons, knobs and tweaking options. I enjoy the challenge of just using a simple yet effective camera.

I don't see this as being a worthwhile upgrade from my D3200 - I wonder why Nikon just make small incremental changes instead of big leaps?

Its still a nice camera for someone who does not want complication or who is on a limited budget.

"I wonder why Nikon just make small incremental changes instead of big leaps?"

Simple. The changes are small because they want to sell the more expensive models too. This way, in a few months time, they launch the D3400 with just enough improvements so that many that bought the D3300 will upgrade to the D3400. And so on...

I disagree... I think they figure this is it for a beginner, or you are going to use it until you realize what is missing and step up to a higher series camera, not the same camera with a thing or two slightly improved. More likely to step to the D7xxx series to get the lens drive motor so you can use something like the 50mm F/1.4 or 1.8 AF-D , to get auto bracketing and HDR settings, to get real time lapse control without needing a remote, and the ability to fully control the camera remotely. So I see the jump from this being to the D7xxx bodies or the D8xx. For someone that is buying their first DSLR, that 24Mp and the Nikon name are the big things in it's favor. I suspect most buyers have no clue what lens would best suit them and will be happy or blame themselves for what the 18-55mm kit lens provides.

DPR: "Each of these cameras is smaller too, which is a major criteria we hear from camera shoppers again and again."

Again and again, camera shoppers in North America and Europe choose DSLRs, rather than smaller (poor selling) mirrorless cameras. Most people aren't infatuated by a camera's small size. Other factors are much more important. Nikon estimates that they are going to sell 6 million DSLRs this fiscal year.

Yeah the only people obsessed with cameras size are the m4/3s and mirroless fanboys on this site. For most people once a camera wont fit in a pocket the size basically becomes irrelevant. It's either the cell phone or lugging a camera around so you might as well take the one that's easier to hang on to, hold steady, and looks like a "real" camera.

"For most people once a camera wont fit in a pocket the size basically becomes irrelevant."I used Nikon equipment for 30+ years and was intending to buy a used D3 until I tried one in Calumet. I was put off by the weight of the camera and three lenses so I bought a used M9, which is much easier to carry with extras. It has its drawbacks of course but it's easy to use and the results are sharp (if I remember to focus!).Phil

The Nikon has a 100 shot buffer burst rate in jpg. And I bet it still focus tracks better than any of the others, one point or not. And the Nikon takes all Nikon lens other than screw drive, a minor point in a entry level camera, IMO.

No Nikon has ever had a 6 shot burst limitation. They are universealy 100 shot. http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_D3300/verdict.shtml"The D3300 offers slightly faster 5fps continuous shooting, compared with 4fps on the EOS SL1 / 100D, but offers a longer JPEG burst rate of 100 frames ( though in practice I found the D3300 slowed significantly after around 70 frames) compared with 28 on the EOS SL1 / 100D. And with a battery that delivers enough power for 700 shots the D3300 will outlast the 380-shot EOS SL1 / 100D between charges."

DPR, did you miss that optical viewfinder thing on the top? All the mirrorless cameras you list don't have viewfinders! The D3300 is an APS-C sensor (a good one at that) with a viewfinder. Compared to an A6000, it's priced pretty well (D3300 is $150 cheaper). If you're going to compare it against mirrorless cameras at least note that an mirrorless with a viewfinder will set you back at least as much.

You really want a reason not to get this camera, talk to people about the old A65. Same sensor, cheaper, built in wifi (and GPS if you're into that), full coverage viewfinder, faster shooting, etc

It's a really great (beginners) DSLR for the given price - but i'd like to see a 100% viewfinder, like on Pentax Entrylevel DSLRs, and perhaps 2 command dials, like Pentax, too. I say this, but being onto the Nikon & Sony Waggon...anyway, i still have my beloved K10D from some couple years ago. ;)

The A6000 have a much higher FPS rate (10 FPS) and a sophisticated AF System, also a Magnesium Chassis, you can't compare this with the D3300,these are different worlds.

But you can compare the A3000 with the D3300 - in which ways the D3300 wins in terms of viewfinder and resolution...but a big plus for the A3000: because of the E-mount, you can virtually adapt every lens via adapter.

Indeed the 35mm and especially the 50mm oss are good enough value. The 50mm is actually an great low light portrait lens. He has a solid point with the mediocre at best telephoto though. That lens is a reason to go to a different mount. Fujfilm has 1 very good and 1 good option in this range. And m43 has plenty of solid option.

just about class leading sensor ? so which apsc sensor is better ???? I am not a Nikon fan, but aren't you getting a camera that with the same lens will take the same photo as any of its 24 mp "big" Nikon brothers ? in a very compact size - at a fraction of the price - from a brand which automatically gets all the nice independent lenses, like the new 16-300 ? and giving away a handful of rare to use features ? Sounds like gold material to me ????

Well for starters it cannot focus will all Nikon lenses out there which is a pretty poor point.

Second Nikon has been screwing around with 3rd party compatibility for some time now. Its possible in future they may find a way to make 3rd party lenses completely incompatible. (Extreme case but seeing what they are doing now its not impossible).

And lastly Nikon seems to be pretty dead when it comes to innovation. They haven't come out with any really new feature in the last couple of years. Canon was in the same boat but they were the first to come out with some very useful Wifi implementation in their 6D. And their dual pixel tech is also very very useful for those upgrading from P&S cameras.

I think a Silver award is justified given the high IQ of this camera but not a Gold.

It is, especially once the price falls into clearance territory. Is the image quality the same as the D7100? Squinting at the dpreview Komparator(tm) suggests not quite, but isn't it better instead to ask: "Will the D3300's restricted feature set prevent me from taking the photos I want to take?"